The keystone authorities in the application of dialectical materialism to political problems, from the Bolsheviks in Russia to Mao and Ho Chi Minh in East Asia, have all postulated that socialism cannot be developed in a universalist sense; that there is no one size fits all model for achieving the revolution and Marxists should instead seek to adapt their doctrines to the specific national circumstances of their time and place.

This process of adaptation is most evidently the case with Mao’s application of Marxism-Leninism to the national characteristics of his native China in the early 20th century, from which he and his cadre was able to identify a method and programme through which to build and organise a mass movement capable of not only seizing order out of the chaos of the Chinese civil war but also subsequently establishing a dictatorship of the proletariat capable of both effectively governing their country while at the same time quashing push back from reactionary social forces bent on safeguarding the old feudal privileges of the old society.

If the principles of this theory hold true, it should be possible to analyse the national circumstances of 21st century American society and identify a modus operandi for developing dual power, with an eventual mind to overturn the old society and establish a dictatorship of the proletariat. What American social phenomena do you think demand adaptations necessary for the organisation of an American mass movement capable of carrying a proletarian revolution through to it’s conclusion? What is your analysis of American society? What obstacles stand in the way of class consciousness, what is the mechanism of their action and how do we defeat them?

  • TeethOrCoat
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    4 years ago

    One thing I haven’t seen articulated too often is what has to come first. Does the US have to fall before imperialism is stopped (the intuitive position) or does imperialism have to stop before the US falls (the not so intuitive position)? Here you are making the case that the US cannot see a change unless imperialism stops but also, how will imperialism ever stop if the US does not change?

    • loathesome dongeaterA
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      4 years ago

      We are already deep into uncharted territory but a lot of it depends on to what extent USA and allies are willing to go to war when their hegemony is threatened. Personally I see something like China’s belt and road initiative (something like that if not exactly that) to help in the transfer of knowledge that would enable the downtrodden nations especially the ones in Africa and Middle East to cast off the chains of IMF debt traps and of the hyper-specialised industrial bases that come with it and able to achieve the basic requirements of self-sustenence like food security.

      The reason I see this as the more important factor is that anti-war movements of all flavours in the USA have not been able to achieve much and the country has proceeded to squat in all corners of the world without any serious opposition. Despite this, countries like Venezuela, Cuba, DPRK, etc. have managed to resist USAmerican imperiliasm with varying degrees of success. As long as some threat of nuclear weapons exists on the side of these countries, the chances of an all out war will be curtailed to some extent.

      I don’t know how history will play out but I feel one of the winning scenarios, if one does exist before civilisation is devoured by climate change, could look something like this.

      • TeethOrCoat
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 years ago

        The reason I see this as the more important factor is that anti-war movements of all flavours in the USA have not been able to achieve much

        I wasn’t talking about anti-war movements though. I was referring to a case of US collapse where logistical support would be cut off from the military, forcing a withdrawal. In other words, material action. Let’s be honest, peaceful protesting and anti-war marches of the like are ultimately just noise to an uncaring ruling class.

        downtrodden nations especially the ones in Africa and Middle East to cast off the chains of IMF debt traps and of the hyper-specialised industrial bases that come with it and able to achieve the basic requirements of self-sustenence like food security.

        Why do you think they haven’t done this yet? Why would they even need the aid of the PRC in the first place?

        • loathesome dongeaterA
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          4 years ago

          For many reasons. A lot of countries have bourgeois states that are aligned to NATO and don’t have the political will to like in India. Then there are countries who don’t have the knowledge and technological basis since their economies since their inception have been centred around catering to the imperialist core.

          The need for aid from PRC or somewhere else comes from the fact that diffusion of knowledge is right now the biggest driver in increasing output. Unless all countries simultaneously turn communist, this can be one of the ways in which the unipolar economic hegemony is disturbed and the unequal terms of trade that come with it.

          • TeethOrCoat
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            4 years ago

            Sure, but your answers don’t really get to the root of the issues. Why are these countries bourgeois states? Why are they aligned with NATO? Why DON’T they have the political will?

            • loathesome dongeaterA
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              4 years ago

              I can’t speak for every country like that. India gained independence primarily due to the effects of WW2 on England and the Atlantic Charter and the independence thus gained was on their terms, which meant they could choose to give the state powers to a political party that allied with England like the Indian National Congress. Brazil is aligned with the USA because they helped install Bolsonaro after a judicial coup etc.

              • TeethOrCoat
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                4 years ago

                Right, but my point was, why even bother with the IMF? Just say fuck it and do what Sankara did.

                • loathesome dongeaterA
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  4 years ago

                  I wish. Even Venezuela have paid off their IMF debt.

                  India is a special case like Brazil and Colombia where it is an appendage of NATO outside the Euro-American geography. We have been doing S-tier bootlicking where we blocked IMF’s SDRs (basically emergency money) for poor countries to appease the USA and have joined them in being hostile towards China while China has been building alliances with Pakistan, Nepal and Sri Lanka. I don’t think our current government even considers throwing off the yoke of imperialism as a priority, ironic considering our fascist rhetoric motto is “self-sufficiency”. And the ruling party faces no credible threats because the rest are liberal failures who got us where we are or toothless idpoliticians who are unable to enact any changes in the rare occassions they have come to power. The main communist party are socdem revisionists and the only revolutionaries are fighting a losing battle alongside indigenous tribals.

                  Covid could change the climate but that remains to be seen. I have also been doing a terrible.job at keeping up with current events due to personal issues.

                  • TeethOrCoat
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    4 years ago

                    I don’t think you understand what I’m saying. I’m not asking so many questions because I’m ignorant. I’m attempting to herd you towards a certain train of thought.

                    You mentioned this earlier with regards to toppling the US:

                    Or something like the global south freeing itself from imperialist chains

                    And then later you mentioned this with regards to 3rd world liberation:

                    help in the transfer of knowledge that would enable the downtrodden nations especially the ones in Africa and Middle East to cast off the chains of IMF debt traps and of the hyper-specialised industrial bases that come with it and able to achieve the basic requirements of self-sustenence like food security.

                    How does the latter point achieve the former point? How would casting off IMF debt traps free a country from imperialism?